If logos are not going to be subject to color contrast requirements, then an exemption similar to that provided in 1.4.5 is required for 1.4.3 (that is, that the visual presentation of a logo is essential in regard to color as well as text size, family, etc).
Sofia
________________________________
From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu]
Sent: Fri 7/03/2008 7:48 AM
To: Sofia Celic; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: 1) Fix to Understanding 1.4.3 Contrast
Hi Sofia,
I'm not sure I understand your comment. There are no other exemptions in
1.4.3. like you describe. No business purpose exemption.
Can you explain what you mean?
(Alt text is still there. But without this note a company with a medium
blue logo would have to change the color of its logo for example.)
Thanks
Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sofia Celic
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 1:48 PM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: 1) Fix to Understanding 1.4.3 Contrast
>
>
> I do not agree with the proposed paragraph and therefore
> would not like to see it in the Understanding document.
>
> Image logos that contain text *are* images of text. They are
> exempt because of other business requirements pertaining to
> their purpose.
>
> Sofia
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org on behalf of Gregg Vanderheiden
> Sent: Fri 7/03/2008 5:29 AM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: 1) Fix to Understanding 1.4.3 Contrast
>
>
>
>
>
> Someone sent me a note and pointed out something in our
>
>
> 1) Fix to Understanding 1.4.3 Contrast
>
> Currently the following sentence appears in Understanding 1.4.3.
> "Stylized text, such as in corporate logos, should be treated
> in terms of its function on the page, which may or may not
> warrant including the content in the text alternative. "
>
> This is about adding alt text (which is SC 1.1.1 not 1.4.3
> contrast which is covered here.
>
> I suggest that it be changed to:
>
> "Logos are not considered 'images of text' even though they
> may contain text or be highly stylized names of
> organizations. Their purpose is to act as an ICON for the
> company rather than be running text or simply stylized text.
> They would not therefore be covered by this provision"
>
> Also add to end of intent.
>
> "High contrast logos are also desirable and more broadly accessible."
>
>
>
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>